Street photography

shaylou said:
Why bother with either? With an L lens the focus time is a fraction of a second in most cases.
Click to expand...

Although this doesn't come across very well, Shayne never actually states that you need an L lens or that L lenses make you a better photographer, so I'd be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and not read so much into it.

shaylou said:
Haha I should of just said fast lens. That was my point. I didn't really understand the prefocus thing.
Click to expand...

shaylou said:
It seems that the focus would not be that accurate that way. I guess it must work if you all are doing it.
Click to expand...

That said, I think it's a bit brash to ask 'why bother with either?' if you don't really understand prefocusing.

If you know where your subject is going to be and you're already focused at this distance, then it will be faster than focusing with any AF lens, L lens or not. I prefocus all of the time with my film cameras, especially my Bronica with a waist level finder, and have no trouble getting photographs in focus at f/2.8.

All of this new technology and fast AF is great, but people have been taking sharp photos long before such features were commonly available.
 
skysh4rk said:
If you know where your subject is going to be and you're already focused at this distance, then it will be faster than focusing with any AF lens, L lens or not. I prefocus all of the time with my film cameras, especially my Bronica with a waist level finder, and have no trouble getting photographs in focus at f/2.8.

All of this new technology and fast AF is great, but people have been taking sharp photos long before such features were commonly available.
Click to expand...

What I don't understand about pre focusing is this. You say you have no problem doing so at 2.8 let's say you are sitting waiting for your subject to walk by,. At 2.8 the subject would have to walk by in the exact position that you had prefocused to have a sharp face. A few inches one way or another would throw the focus off. I was thinking that the method would work if you were stopped way down but wouldn't work at all wide open. I just can't picture this working for some reason.
 
shaylou said:
What I don't understand about pre focusing is this. You say you have no problem doing so at 2.8 let's say you are sitting waiting for your subject to walk by,. At 2.8 the subject would have to walk by in the exact position that you had prefocused to have a sharp face. A few inches one way or another would throw the focus off. I was thinking that the method would work if you were stopped way down but wouldn't work at all wide open. I just can't picture this working for some reason.
Click to expand...

Have you used a depth of field calculator? There's an online one here

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

A reasonable situation you describe would be the subject walking past at around 10 feet away, if your focal length is around 35mm then the depth of field for a D5100 is around 2 feet 8 inches. Go wider to 24mm and it's 6 1/2 feet.
To get your few inches, you'd have to shoot at 200mm for 1", 150mm for 2" and 100mm for 4".

Photocalc for the iphone is a useful app with a DOF calc. Handy for carrying around.

(I now have a fully manual wide lens so it's useful to have ;) )
 
Last edited:
And try 35mm on crop at f8 for subject 10 metres away and you will see how it works. DoF from 5m to infinity which is all you need for most street shots
 
shaylou said:
What I don't understand about pre focusing is this. You say you have no problem doing so at 2.8 let's say you are sitting waiting for your subject to walk by,. At 2.8 the subject would have to walk by in the exact position that you had prefocused to have a sharp face. A few inches one way or another would throw the focus off. I was thinking that the method would work if you were stopped way down but wouldn't work at all wide open. I just can't picture this working for some reason.
Click to expand...

If you understand how sensor/film size, focal length, camera-to-subject distance, and aperture affect depth of field, you can easily tailor your settings to ensure that you get your desired subject in focus whether you're shooting at f/2.8 or f/11.

For street photography, my working distance might be something like 9-16ft which gives me a depth of field ranging from 1 to 3 feet at f/2.8 on 6x6 medium format film at 80m (this equates to something like f/1.75 at 50mm in 35mm terms). This allows me to get my subject plenty sharp, but clearly separate it from the foreground and background.

I don't only shoot at f/2.8, however, and I will adjust to suit the circumstances (e.g., if the subject is closer or I'm shooting a group of people, etc.).

There are also strategies that you can use to help with prefocusing. For instance, I scout out markings on the pavement or street signs in the area that will allow me to determine the camera-to-subject distances so that I'm ready to go once I get my subject is in frame.

As good as AF and modern cameras are, I know more about what I want to focus on than my camera or lens ever will. Therefore, I generally prefer to rely on my own skills and knowledge to take my photos. If I miss the shot, I only have myself to blame.
 
Byker28i said:
Have you used a depth of field calculator? There's an online one here

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

A reasonable situation you describe would be the subject walking past at around 10 feet away, if your focal length is around 35mm then the depth of field for a D5100 is around 2 feet 8 inches. Go wider to 24mm and it's 6 1/2 feet.
To get your few inches, you'd have to shoot at 200mm for 1", 150mm for 2" and 100mm for 4".

Photocalc for the iphone is a useful app with a DOF calc. Handy for carrying around.

(I now have a fully manual wide lens so it's useful to have ;) )
Click to expand...

Well don't I feel silly. I. So use to using the zoom for people shots I didn't consider shooting the shot wide. I know it doesn't look like it at this point but I do understand dof. Lol

Thanks for clearing that up for me.
 
I was wondering the same question about the street photography in London.
I would like to get more experience with street and especially people photos on the streets.
I should try these days...
So, if I make photos I have the right to upload them on the web ?
I am not talking to sell the photos, just to upload to social network or my portfolio ?

Thanks in advance.

Regards,
K.
 
If you taking photos in public places where photography is completely allowed then yes you can upload those photos to the web.
 
ernesto said:
If you taking photos in public places where photography is completely allowed then yes you can upload those photos to the web.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the answer.
And yes, I was talking about public places, like streets here in London.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top